Should parks host commercial events like Big Air? (2 letters)

All supporters of rational government behavior should applaud Joanne Ditmer’s column, in which she skewers the city for allowing the recently concluded Big Air skioramapaloozaganza.

If there is a better example of Californication of our public spaces, I would like to see it.

As Ditmer pointed out, the free seats at Big Air were provided as a token. You had to spend $25 and up to get a good view. For all the brain damage and labor required to construct Big Air, the city received only 15 percent of proceeds. And that may turn out to be 15 percent of nothing. We’re waiting to find out how much environmental damage was done; there had to have been some.

I am open to very limited use of public parks for events in which a commercial entity has some kind of sponsorship role, and a truly modest fee is charged. But I draw the line at Disneylandish farces like Big Air and the thankfully cancelled film series, which would have netted the city (maybe) a laughable 250 grand.
Mayoral candidate Doug Linkhart has taken an unequivocal stand against commercial abuse of our parks, a major reason I’m voting for him.

Jack Farrar, Denver

This letter was published in the Feb. 1 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

Let me get this straight. No taxpayer in Denver will walk into Civic Center, for free, in the middle of the week, day or night, because of the high concentration of police monitoring the homeless, the alcohol consumption, the drug sales and general fear of personal safety — but schedule a controlled event in there in the middle of the week, that people have to pay to attend, one that attracts well over 10,000 people, and the City Council is taking heat for allowing such use of the park?

Downtown, on a winter weeknight, thousands of people watched an event with a towering, illuminated ski jump funneling right into the arc of City Hall and the beloved Christmas lights that adorn City Hall pulsating to the beat of music.

What’s wrong with using the city parks to have fun? More people had fun in that park last Tuesday and Wednesday than anyone’s had in that park on a winter weeknight in 30 years. The park purists need to exhibit a bit more tolerance for diverse audiences and uses for the parks. They can have Civic Center back the other 363 days of the year. Just not after dark.

Rick Reiter, Denver

This letter was published in the Feb. 1 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

I agree with Rick, so I won’t take time to deconstruct his letter. So, let’s look at the words that Jack wrote. I will start with the oddest comment first. “We’re waiting to find out how much environmental damage was done; there had to have been some.” We cannot stop living just because life might have some kind of environmental impact.

Next, let’s look at the misapplication of a term. If there is a better example of Californication of our public spaces, I would like to see it. This term was coined in the 70’s when we didn’t want people from California moving here and changing our state to be like California. Its too late, so letting Big Air happen won’t add to the destruction to the way Colorado used to be.

This last area is just a personal note. “You had to spend $25 and up to get a good view.” My daughter went to Big Air and didn’t have that great a view. But, that doesn’t mean Big Air shouldn’t happen again. Maybe they will learn how to do it better next time.

Thorjohnson

I agree with Rick, so I won’t take time to deconstruct his letter. So, let’s look at the words that Jack wrote. I will start with the oddest comment first. “We’re waiting to find out how much environmental damage was done; there had to have been some.” We cannot stop living just because life might have some kind of environmental impact.

Next, let’s look at the misapplication of a term. If there is a better example of Californication of our public spaces, I would like to see it. This term was coined in the 70’s when we didn’t want people from California moving here and changing our state to be like California. Its too late, so letting Big Air happen won’t add to the destruction to the way Colorado used to be.

This last area is just a personal note. “You had to spend $25 and up to get a good view.” My daughter went to Big Air and didn’t have that great a view. But, that doesn’t mean Big Air shouldn’t happen again. Maybe they will learn how to do it better next time.

Guest

i think you missed the point. what were the costs of ‘big air’ to the city, how much money did they invest in the event, how much will the city make? the ramp cost a million; fences, staffing, security, ect doesnt come for nothing. clean up and maintenance of the parks doesnt happen for free either, if there was significant damage to the park who do you think foots the bill? what are the costs for returning the park to its normal condition. where do the profits go, do they get funneled back into clean up or do they disappear down some other channel?

myself, id like to know what the actual costs were, what the profits are, and where the money went. its hard to be very trusting these days, and i think its a legitimate concern that this event and the handling of this event may have not been in the publics best interests.
i like to see events like this, but they need to be profitable or at least break even. the cost of the tickets themselves priced a lot of people out, 25$ is too steep for a lot of people hit hard by the recession, and having a tiered ticket system seemed to be a bit classist. when its public land being used their needs to be an effort to make it more affordable, and having a first come first served policy for seating would have been appropriate.

all said and done im left with an uneasy feeling about the direction denver parks has taken.

Goodspkr

You must be a lot of fun at a party, G. Let’s see, you want it to make a profit or at least break even, but they were charging too much for the tickets (at least that got good seats), but if you didn’t want to pay you could still see something. That sounds very egalitarian to me. The people who paid for the good seats allowed the people who didn’t pay to at least see something.

There are people who will stand in a bread line and demand toast.

Thorjohnson

I didn’t miss anything. I chose to address the things Jack talked about that I thought were dumb.

Guest

why would you want to argue semantics? who cares about the etymology of the word californication, its obvious what the letter writer meant.

your point about damage to the park makes little sense, if you had read the column the letter referred to the concern over the impact large crowds and construction would have on the park. concern over irreversible and costly damage to a historical park. but i get what you are saying: why let protecting and safeguarding places and buildings of historical significance for future generations get in the way of a good time. you think thats a good argument? and then the cost of tickets. sure you could see the show from further away, you can see a mountain from far away too. you honestly see nothing wrong with a tiered ticket system for a public park? public parks are for everyone equally, not just the wealthy and affluent. its not private property, its public land, its an event being paid for by the public for the public. it should be accessible to the public, all of the public.

Guest

i think you missed the point. what were the costs of ‘big air’ to the city, how much money did they invest in the event, how much will the city make? the ramp cost a million; fences, staffing, security, ect doesnt come for nothing. clean up and maintenance of the parks doesnt happen for free either, if there was significant damage to the park who do you think foots the bill? what are the costs for returning the park to its normal condition. where do the profits go, do they get funneled back into clean up or do they disappear down some other channel?

myself, id like to know what the actual costs were, what the profits are, and where the money went. its hard to be very trusting these days, and i think its a legitimate concern that this event and the handling of this event may have not been in the publics best interests.
i like to see events like this, but they need to be profitable or at least break even. the cost of the tickets themselves priced a lot of people out, 25$ is too steep for a lot of people hit hard by the recession, and having a tiered ticket system seemed to be a bit classist. when its public land being used their needs to be an effort to make it more affordable, and having a first come first served policy for seating would have been appropriate.

all said and done im left with an uneasy feeling about the direction denver parks has taken.

Thorjohnson

I agree with Rick, so I won’t take time to deconstruct his letter. So, let’s look at the words that Jack wrote. I will start with the oddest comment first. “We’re waiting to find out how much environmental damage was done; there had to have been some.” We cannot stop living just because life might have some kind of environmental impact.

Next, let’s look at the misapplication of a term. If there is a better example of Californication of our public spaces, I would like to see it. This term was coined in the 70’s when we didn’t want people from California moving here and changing our state to be like California. Its too late, so letting Big Air happen won’t add to the destruction to the way Colorado used to be.

This last area is just a personal note. “You had to spend $25 and up to get a good view.” My daughter went to Big Air and didn’t have that great a view. But, that doesn’t mean Big Air shouldn’t happen again. Maybe they will learn how to do it better next time.

Goodspkr

You must be a lot of fun at a party, G. Let’s see, you want it to make a profit or at least break even, but they were charging too much for the tickets (at least that got good seats), but if you didn’t want to pay you could still see something. That sounds very egalitarian to me. The people who paid for the good seats allowed the people who didn’t pay to at least see something.

There are people who will stand in a bread line and demand toast.

Thorjohnson

I didn’t miss anything. I chose to address the things Jack talked about that I thought were dumb.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.